D 651 
.C4 S4 
Copy 1 



D 651 
.C4 S4 
Copy 1 



all the Treaty of Peace Be 
One of Justice or One of Infamy? 



AN APPEAL 

to 

The Members of the Senate 
of the United States 



by 

Major Louis Livingston Seaman, M.D., L.L.D., F.R.G.S. 

President, Emeritus of The China Society of America 



"The good old rule, the simple plan, 
That they should take who have the power, 
And they should keep who can." 



NEW YORK, JULY 29, 1919. 






(Kgf i<4 J^ 






An Appeal to the Members of the Senate of the United 
States. 

Shall the Treaty of Peace Be One of Justice, or One of 

Infamy ? 

That is the question the United States is now called 
upon to consider, and the destiny of Nations hangs on 
the decision. America entered the great war as the 
champion of smaller nations — to preserve the indepen- 
dence of imperiled countries, and to rescue civilization 
from barbarism. From its birth our Republic has stood 
for the rights of the oppressed. Our ideals have been for 
Liberty and Justice. Our great civil conflict removed 
the blot of slavery from our land — our Spanish Campaign 
gave freedom and prosperity and happiness to an en- 
slaved people in Cuba and in the Philippines, and our 
compensation for the sacrifice was the gratification of our 
ideals. We acknowledged no masters, and we do not 
propose to. 

The problem today is the ratification of the Peace 
Treaty with the Huns and the creation of a League of 
Nations. Shall the Fourth of July, 1919, pass into history 
as the last anniversary of American independence? 
Shall we, by agreeing to Article 10 of the covenant of the 
League of Nations surrender our sovereignty gained in 
1776, to Great Britain, who by a vote of six to one, can 
impose upon us the incalculable obligation of preserving 
the territorial integrity and political independence of her- 
self or any member of the League of Nations in any part 
of the globe? Are we prepared to submit our traditional 
attitude regarding purely American questions to a tri- 
bunal in which we are in such a hopeless minority or in 
which the vote of New Zealand could count as equal to 



our own ? Shades of Washington and Jefferson ! What 
would be their verdict if they could witness the depths 
to which our land has been dragged in order to gratify 
the personal ambition and egotism of the "too proud to 
fight" pacifist who in the Peace Conference at Paris has 
been so hopelessly outwitted by trained European and 
Oriental diplomacy that today he is the laughing 
stock of European statesmen, and whose refusal to pre- 
pare for the inevitable, resulted in a prolongation of the 
war for more than a year, the loss of more than a million 
lives, the destruction of property inestimable, and suffer- 
ing and misery that cannot be described or measured. 
And poor China — whose Government, in the opinion of 
many competent authorities, has given more happiness 
and individual liberty to a greater mass of humanity 
than any other Government in the world — whose rep- 
resentatives were promised by our President that if 
their country entered the war in 1917 their territorial 
integrity would be preserved — where will China stand if 
this unholy alliance is consummated, and Shantung — 
the birthplace of Confucius, sacred to the Chinese — with 
its forty million inhabitants turned over to the tender 
mercy of the Japanese whose policy of territorial ag- 
grandizement rivals that of the European nations, as 
witnessed in Korea, Manchuria and the Pacific Isles, and 
whose threats of aggression, made at the point of the 
bayonet, prevented China's entrance in the war in its 
earliest days? 

In August, 1914, I cabled Wu Ting Fang, Secre- 
tary of State of China, from Ostend, Belgium imploring 
China to sever diplomatic relations and declare war on 
Germany at once — to immediately seize all territory in 
China then occupied by Germany, to refuse further pay- 
ment of indemnity for the Boxer uprising, and to demand 
repayment of all indemnities already paid, together with 
substantial damages for German occupation of Chinese 
territory. All this I then regarded, and still regard, as 



the moral right of China, for there would have been no 
Boxer uprising had it not been for Germany's policy of 
barbarism and aggression, when in carrying out the 
Kaiser's order "to behave like Huns," they committed 
acts of "Kultur" and cruelty that challenged those since 
perpetrated in Belgium and Poland. Now is China's 
opportunity to regain her lost provinces and obtain jus- 
tice, and the people of the United States who are famil- 
iar with the conditions and know the truth demand that 
the United States Senate shall secure this result. 

It was hoped that the carnival of territorial lust, which 
for centuries caused untold bloodshed the world over, 
had culminated in the partitioning of Africa — the last of 
the continents to be parceled off by the world's looters, 
who in the division of the spoils, followed, as the robber 
barons of feudal days, 

"The good old rule, the simple plan, 
That they should take who have the power, 
And they should keep who can." 

But look at China today — that grand old country, with 
its great wall which for over twenty centuries protected 
it from the hordes of Tartars and Mongols on the north, 
while its Thibetan ranges on the west, and impenetrable 
forests on the south, permitted it to live in peace and 
tranquillity thousands of years, with no fear of molesta- 
tion by "foreign devils," from land or sea. And in this 
time the beautiful but fallacious philosophy of Confu- 
cius, which taught the rule of moral suasion rather than 
that by might, grew until its essence was expressed in 
the proverb, "Better have no child than one who is a 
soldier" — this, too, in a land where it is considered a dis- 
grace to die childless. 

And what was the natural result of this pacifism? A 
condition of insecurity, of defenselessness, of inability 
to enforce that first law of nature — self-protection — fol- 



lowed, which when realized by the Occidental nations 
resulted in their seizing great sections of her domains 
upon trivial excuses, and wringing most valuable con- 
cessions from her rulers. 

As a direct result of this spoliation, the worm at last 
turned, and the Boxer uprising of 1900 followed, having 
for its declared purpose the forcible expulsion of all for- 
eigners from the country, and the recovery by China of 
her despoiled possessions. I say, without fear of contra- 
diction by those who are familiar with that issue (and 
I was there), that that uprising was one of the most 
splendid exhibitions of patriotism witnessed in modern 
times. The methods pursued by the Chinese, due to the 
ignorance of their misguided leaders, and the horrors 
that followed, have afforded the theme for many a tragic 
tale and numberless explanatory theories. But the plain 
fact cannot be gainsaid, nor too strongly emphasized, 
that the essential motive of that propaganda was the 
freeing of the land from the hated foreigners, who, in cur- 
rent phrase, had "robbed the people of their country." 

It was then, that in reprisal and revenge, the so-called 
civilized world turned against them. The eight allied 
armies of the "great powers" marched to their capital, 
slaughtered their people, raped their women, looted their 
temples, their treasure and their habitations, committed 
brutalities that rivaled those of the Huns in the recent 
great tragedy, and created a sentiment in China which 
fairly crucified Christianity, and which should redound to 
the shame and humiliation of the Christian nations whose 
forces participated in the outrages ; but which, instead, 
secured monstrous indemnities and subjected China to 
the most humiliating terms of peace that were ever in- 
flicted upon a nation, and that have kept her poverty- 
stricken ever since. America, however, has some reason 
for pride in that she waived claims to over half the in- 
demnity, whilst her great statesman, John Hay, suc- 
ceeded temporarily in preserving the integrity of the 
country by his splendid policy of the "open door." 



Never shall I forget that winter at Ching Wan Tao, 
following the war, where detachments of the allied army 
were gathered awaiting the fate of China. They re- 
minded me of a pack of hungry wolves around the car- 
cass of a dead animal — each fearing to set his fangs in 
the carcass, lest while so engaged his neighbor might do 
the same with him. And so during the long negotiations 
that finally led to the declaration of peace, the situation 
continued. 

Four years later I again visited that scene, and there, 
in smaller numbers, were found the troops of many na- 
tions still waiting, ready to seize the first opportunity 
to partition the country and to secure their share of the 
spoil. But more pressing engagements were then immi- 
nent, involving the attention of some of the powers. The 
Russo-Japanese struggle was on, and China was given a 
temporary respite. From that time until the outbreak 
of the revolution which led to the establishment of the 
Republic, China paid the indemnity claims with such 
regularity that no opportunity was found for interfer- 
ence. 

For more than three-quarters of a century, beginning 
with the unrighteous Opium War, and even later, 
China has been subjected to a series of squeezes and 
despoilment of her territory to an extent unequaled in 
history. The iniquitous indemnities wrung from her as 
the result of the Boxer campaign would have been re- 
versed, and the countries now receiving them would 
be paying for the outrages committed, had right, instead 
of might, prevailed. The powerful governments and 
financial institutions doing business in the Orient have 
become obsessed with the idea that it is legitimate busi- 
ness to "squeeze" the country, regardless of right or 
justice, and in transferring the so-called German rights in 
Shantung to Japan the Big Three are today continuing 
that policy — and making our country, the United States, 
underwriters to the unholy deal. 



The effect upon China of the spoliation of her terri- 
tory and finances created among the leading minds of 
her people an appreciation of her weakness, and of the 
necessity for the adoption of Occidental methods for 
self-protection. They saw the absolute imbecility of 
continuing the policy of the Manchu dynasty, and the 
necessity for a change of government and the Chinese 
Republic became a reality. The character of the revo- 
lution which made it possible was remarkable. It ob- 
tained the maximum of liberty with the minimum of 
bloodshed. It was an evolution rather than a revolution, 
the most potent factors of which were those of peace, 
and not of war. They were the results of trade with 
foreign nations, the importation of modern inventions, 
railroads, telegraphs, newspapers ; the work of Christian 
missionaries, schools and colleges established by them ; 
but, most of all, the influence of Chinese students who 
had been educated in foreign universities, and who car- 
ried back to their native land the high ideals of Occidental 
government. In comparison with the epoch-making wars 
for freedom in Occidental lands — the French revolution, 
England's fight for Magna Charta, or our own great 
seven years' struggle for independence — the Chinese rev- 
olution was almost bloodless. It is stated that the total 
mortality of the war which secured the emancipation of 
400,000,000 of people, was less than the number lost in 
the Battle of the Wilderness, or in single conflicts in the 
war just concluded. 

The moderation shown by the successful leaders to 
their late rulers, was another striking characteristic. In- 
stead of the guillotine or exile, they were retired with 
liberal pensions, and allowed to retain their empty titles. 
The leaders enjoined upon their followers the protection 
of life and property, both commercial and missionary, 
and these orders were strictly obeyed. 

A people who carried to a successful termination such 
a revolution, deserve the respect and recognition of the 



world in their present great crisis. The enemies and loot- 
ers of China today forget the traditions of the race — that 
China was old when Chaldea and Babylon were young, 
that she saw the rise and fall of Grecian and Roman 
civilization, and that she has maintained the integrity and 
honor of her government ever since ; that her scholars 
discovered the compass and invented the intellectual 
game of chess, when the Huns of Europe and the Jap- 
anese were groveling in the darkness of mediaevalism ; 
that she produced her own science, literature, art, philos- 
ophy and religion, whose founder, Confucius, five hun- 
dred years before the birth of Christ, expounded the doc- 
trine of Christianity in the saying: "Do not do unto 
others what you would not have others do unto you." 
They forget that for nearlya thousand years China has 
been nearer a democracy in many features of its govern- 
ment than any other government then in existence. The 
fundamental unit of democracy, the foundation upon 
which our own government rests, is embodied in the 
principle of the New England town meeting. All author- 
ities on democracy, De Tocqueville, Bryce and the 
Compte de Paris, agree in this and in China all local gov- 
ernment for centuries has been controlled by local author- 
ities. 

The Chinese have never sought territorial aggran- 
dizement, but have loved the paths of peace where the 
law of moral suasion, and not of might, ruled. They pos- 
sess qualities of industry, economy, temperance and 
tranquillity, unsurpassed by any nation on earth. With 
these qualities they are in the great race of the survival 
of the fittest to stay. They are to be feared by foreign 
nations more for their virtues than for their vices ; and in 
their present struggle for the maintenance of their ter- 
ritory, they deserve our earnest sympathy and support. 
Will America, the champion of justice, now desert that 
grand old country and witness its vivisection when we 
have the power to prevent it? 



The Japanese claim their country is overcrowded and 
they require more room for their increasing population. 
Is this a legitimate reason that the 450 million Chinese 
should be crowded out of the land in which they have 
lived for 6,000 years? Is China to become a second 
Honolulu where 60% of the population are Japanese? 

Japan has already been rewarded many times for her 
contribution to the victory of the allies in being relieved 
of the threatening danger from Germany which, when in 
possession of Kauo Chau, strategically commanded the 
Japanese Sea, and where a strong navy would be a per- 
petual menace ; and also, by the award of the rich islands 
north of the Equator, which seem to be forgotten when 
this subject is discussed. 

Dr. David Jayne Hill our former ambassador to Ger- 
many stated in the North American Review that the 
Senate "can ratify the Treaty of Peace and at the same 
time can reject a compact for the League of Nations." 
We hope the Senate will exercise its Constitutional right 
and defeat the creation of any League which is founded 
upon such monstrous injustice to a land which so richly 
deserves our protection, but which Mr. Wilson, who 
recognized it as a Republic, has deserted. 

Defeated and made the laughing stock by the diplo- 
macy of Lloyd George and the Japanese who, to use the 
language of the street, "put it all over him" while I was 
in Paris in the last days of the Peace Congress through 
the bluff of recognizing no color distinctions in the 
League of Nations — Wilson after urging the participation 
of China in the war, deliberately reversed his position — 
granted rights that never existed to Japan and, to save 
his face, now seeks to have his action endorsed by the 
American people. Was such a travesty of injustice ever 
attempted before and does he think he can "fool all the 
American people all of the time," including the United 
States Senate? 

The covenant of the League of Nations is presumed 
to be based upon equity. When I studied law, the first 

10 



axiom in that court was, "He who conies into equity 
must come with clean hands." Does Japan after her 
treatment of Korea and her secret treaties won by bribes 
and threats, come into this court with clean hands? Ger- 
many had no more rights in Shantung than a robber, 
who forcibly enters a house at night and whose expul- 
sion could not be enforced by its owner. I was in Shan- 
tung at the time these so-called rights were claimed and 
the whole world knows how baseless they are. It also 
knows how much value the hypocritical Hun places on 
a so-called "missionary." And now Japan for the insig- 
nificant part she played in the war, where her entire mor- 
tality amounted to about 800, demands these so-called 
rights of Germany and many others as her share of the 
swag. And she further demands the stamp of approval 
of the Peace Commission and League of Nations. And 
America's self-appointed representative, Mr. Wilson, and 
his rubber stamp associates approve these demands. 
What would Lincoln and Burlingame and Hay, who won 
the respect and confidence of China through honest treat- 
ment and the establishment of the policy of the "Open 
Door" say if they were here ! Would they not with one 
voice damn a document, whose initial act was of such 
monstrous injustice and will the United States Senate do 
less? 

China's contribution to the victory of the Allies was 
far greater than that of Japan. With 100,000 men in the 
trenches in Belgium and France (and I was there and saw 
many who will never return), and another 100,000 in the 
munition plants of England, China did her part in defeat- 
ing the Hun. She did this at the instigation of the United 
States ; and unless something is done to disassociate our 
name from the proposed Shantung settlement of the 
Peace Treaty, the Chinese people for generations to come, 
will regard America and Americans with suspicion and 
contempt. 

If the whole structure, erected for safeguarding the 
peace of the world, and preventing a "breaking of its 

11 



heart/' depends on the rape of a nation of 400,000,000 inno- 
cent souls who trust to the honor of America for justice, 
then let the structure undergo reconstruction, or let Am- 
erica refuse to be a party to such a crime. A structure, 
founded upon treachery or injustice is not one to receive 
the endorsement of a nation whose inheritance of freedom 
was bequeathed as a rich legacy by a once hardy, brave 
and patriotic, but now lamented and departed race of 
ancestors, and whose duty it is to transmit it to coming 
generations "unprofaned and undecayed by the lapse of 
time." 

And just here it might be pertinent to ask who re- 
quested Japan's assistance, or intervention in driving 
the Huns out of Kiao Chau? Did China? Oh, no! 
Japan began hostilities when China was not at war with 
Germany. She landed her troops more than a hundred 
miles north of Tsing Tao, and marched them through 
Chinese territory, subsisting them largely on the country 
through which they passed (thus committing what is 
usually called a trespass) and with the assistance of the 
British and Chinese, the 4,000 Germans were defeated. 
But let it be distinctly understood, that with the British 
fleet blockading the harbor of Kiao Chau — the Chinese 
could have accomplished the same result without assist- 
ance from Japan or any other power. 

In discussing the Shantung question, Professor Jere- 
miah W. Jenks, Research Professor of Government and 
Public Administration and Director of the Far Eastern 
Bureau says : 

"In laying plans for the control of Shantung, Ja- 
pan has been playing for a big prize, for the control of 
Kiao Chau and the railroads of Shantung practically 
means the control of the capital province of China, and 
of the chief normal shipping port for all of North China. 
The war gave her an excuse to seize Kiao Chau, which 
she did on November 6, 1914. Her next step in China 
was to present in January, 1915, a secret series of demands, 

12 



which if granted would in the near future enable Japar 
to dominate the policy of China from the military, finan- 
cial and political viewpoints. The Japanese government 
at first falsely denied that such demands had been made, 
and when it saw it could not conceal the fact it gave out 
a list of "requests," suppressing altogether those that 
most endangered China's sovereignty. Under threat of 
war China acceded to all the demands but Group V, 
which would have made her a subject nation. Japan 
stated that Group V would be reserved for further con- 
sideration. From the time that Japan seized Kiao Chau. 
she has treated Shantung as a conquered province, oc- 
cupying the German buildings for military and admin- 
istrative purposes, placed guards along the railway line 
to the capital, has assumed military control of property 
and has instituted civil government over the sections she 
occupies. Confirmation by the Big Three of Japan's 
claims to this territory, with the unwritten understand- 
ing that Japan shall eventually return it to China, has 
roused a storm of indignation among Chinese every- 
where, and there are reports that the Chinese will resort 
to their most effective weapon, a boycott against all 
things Japanese," which, if not successful, may be fol- 
lowed by war. 

Senator Borah stated the case admirably when he 
said, "The Shantung provision should come out of this 
treaty definitely and conclusively. It is no different in 
principle from the arrangement with reference to Alsace- 
Lorraine fifty years ago. It is in fact no different in prin- 
ciple from the dismemberment of Poland nearly 200 
years ago. Both of these transactions planted the seeds 
of future wars, and both went far to impeach and destroy 
the moral prestige of all nations responsible for these 
crimes. The mark of Cain has been upon them ever 
since." 

As already stated — the question the Senate has to de- 
termine is, whether it will endorse the decision of the 



13 



Peace Conference in the Shantung controversy and 
thereby make America an underwriter of that outrage? 
If it decides that the fictitious claims of Japan to the so- 
called German rights in Shantung shall be transferred 
from China to Japan, it will compound a felony, it will 
commit an act of perfidy unsurpassed in American his- 
tory, and it will be an act of injustice to China that is 
destined to bring about another war in the near future 
in which the brutality and mortality are likely to far ex- 
ceed the record of the great tragedy just ended. Instead 
of proving an instrument for the preservation of peace 
its first result is likely to provoke a just and righteous 
war. In case China should decide to fight for the reten- 
tion of her rights, on which side will America — ordered 
by Lloyd George — array her armies? The Chinese have 
long memories. I well remember a conversation with 
His Excellency Li Hung Chang in his Yamen in Peking 
during the Boxer War, when we were discussing the 
danger from the prolonged presence of the allied armies 
in China. "Oh/' he said, "they will not stay long.' 
"Well," I replied, "the Manchus remained some time — 
nearly three hundred years." "What is 300 years in the 
life of China?" was his answer. And in that time the 
Manchus had been absorbed. 

In the comparatively recent Ty Ping rebellion the 
mortality amounted to over 15 millions. If the military 
awakening of China occurs as a result of the wrongs to 
which it has been subjected by the Peace Commission 
the war that will follow and the mortality that will result 
will be without precedent. 

Query. — As a starter for Perpetual Peace, is the 
United States prepared to assume this responsibility? 
And, is a League of Nations based on such a damnable, 
fraudulent and iniquitous foundation likely to serve as 
an inspiration for humanity and to bring about "Peace on 
earth and good will toward men?" 



14 



The following resolution was passed at a recent meet- 
ing of The American Defense Society : 

Resolved, That the American Defense Society 
requests the Senate not to ratify those provisions 
in the Peace Treaty which convey to Japan the 
rights, interests and privileges heretofore held in 
the Province of Shantung by the Empire of Ger- 
many, and that a copy of this resolution be trans- 
mitted to the Chairman of the Committee on For- 
eign Relations of the Senate of the United States. 

MAJOR LOUIS LIVINGSTON SEAMAN, 

M.D., L.L.D., F.R.G.S. 
President, Emeritus of The China Societv of America, 



New York, July 29th, 1919. 



15 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



111 









020 914 607 1 # 



